If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

some common sense, please!

Hate to name-call, but anyone who would wear a gun, let alone an assault weapon anywhere near a presidential function is a TOTAL MORON! Has nothing to do with Obama or Bush or ANY president, just a total lack of respect and common sense. And besides, they have to know they probably have at least one set of crosshairs on their earhole at all times....I'd hate to have to scratch my a$$ and have a secret service agent mistake that for a draw!

My biggest concern about that, is that its giving a bad image to gun-owning Americans, and is only serving to stir up anti-gun rhetoric in the media, and lord knows we don't need any more of that!

Hate to name-call, but anyone who would wear a gun, let alone an assault weapon anywhere near a presidential function is a TOTAL MORON! Has nothing to do with Obama or Bush or ANY president, just a total lack of respect and common sense. And besides, they have to know they probably have at least one set of crosshairs on their earhole at all times....I'd hate to have to scratch my a$$ and have a secret service agent mistake that for a draw!

My biggest concern about that, is that its giving a bad image to gun-owning Americans, and is only serving to stir up anti-gun rhetoric in the media, and lord knows we don't need any more of that!

I find no earthly reason why it rates attention or worthy of a news story.

No law was broken. It is legal. What warrant this legal activity being reported in the news?

Last edited by subroc; 08-18-2009 at 05:31 PM.

subroc

Article [I.]
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Article [II.]
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I find no earthly reason why it rates attention or worthy of a news story.

No law was broken. It is legal. What warrant this legal activity being reported in the news?

Its because there is still an anti-gun movement in this country, and any chance they get to highlight gun-owners as rednecks, morons, or dangerously stupid, they put it all over the news. Realizing that, I would urge these morons not to make their moronocy a public spectacle, by throwing their "legal" fuel on the fire. It serves no purpose other than to make it harder for you and I to explain such behavior to our friends who ask questions about guns.

I always try to conduct myself and portray gun owners as responsible, safety-minded individuals who use good sense about guns ownership. At that, I also staunchly defend my right to carry and own guns. When people ask me how I would justify carrying a semi-auto to a presidential appearance, its really difficult, and basically have to cede the point that there are some idiots who own guns. Not all, but some. And that's who they point tv cameras at, not me and you.

I find no earthly reason why it rates attention or worthy of a news story.

No law was broken. It is legal. What warrant this legal activity being reported in the news?

And nothing happened, other than a CNN reporter became aploplectic over it. No one was threatened. No one offered to use a firearm.

Stupid? Sure. But, if being stupid is a news story, those guys should have more than enough to report without an hourly update on the Jackson family.

Evan

"Prepare your dog in such a manner that the work he is normally called upon to do under-whelms him, not overwhelms him." ~ Evan Graham“People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.”

You’re acting outraged, just as CNN intended. It illustrates, at least to me, that you are driven by left wing outrage. Rather than needing to defend the action, ask them why they are outraged. It appears you believe that gun ownership is a fringe activity or right needing your defense.

subroc

Article [I.]
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Article [II.]
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.